IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-01923238.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The intention to use an electronic health record and its antecedents among three different categories of clinical staff

Author

Listed:
  • Claudio Vitari

    (MTS - Management Technologique et Strategique - EESC-GEM Grenoble Ecole de Management)

  • Roxana Ologeanu-Taddei

    (MRM - Montpellier Research in Management - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - UPVD - Université de Perpignan Via Domitia - Groupe Sup de Co Montpellier (GSCM) - Montpellier Business School - UM - Université de Montpellier)

Abstract

Background Like other sectors, the healthcare sector has to deal with the issue of users' acceptance of IT. In healthcare, different factors affecting healthcare professionals' acceptance of software applications have been investigated. Unfortunately, inconsistent results have been found, maybe because the different studies focused on different IT and occupational groups. Consequently, more studies are needed to investigate these implications for recent technology, such as Electronic Health Records (EHR). Methods Given these findings in the existing literature, we pose the following research question: "To what extent do the different categories of clinical staff (physicians, paraprofessionals and administrative personnel) influence the intention to use an EHR and its antecedents?" To answer this research question we develop a research model that we empirically tested via a survey, including the following variables: intention to use, ease of use, usefulness, anxiety, self-efficacy, trust, misfit and data security. Our purpose is to clarify the possible differences existing between different staff categories. Results For the entire personnel, all the hypotheses are confirmed: anxiety, self-efficacy, trust influence ease of use; ease of use, misfit, self-efficacy, data security impact usefulness; usefulness and ease of use contribute to intention to use the EHR. They are also all confirmed for physicians, residents, carers and nurses but not for secretaries and assistants. Secretaries' and assistants' perception of the ease of use of EHR does not influence their intention to use it and they could not be influenced by self-efficacy in the development of their perception of the ease of use of EHR. Conclusions These results may be explained by the fact that secretaries, unlike physicians and nurses, have to follow rules and procedures for their work, including working with EHR. They have less professional autonomy than healthcare professionals and no medical responsibility. This result is also in line with previous literature highlighting that administrators are more motivated by the use of IT in healthcare.

Suggested Citation

  • Claudio Vitari & Roxana Ologeanu-Taddei, 2018. "The intention to use an electronic health record and its antecedents among three different categories of clinical staff," Post-Print halshs-01923238, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-01923238
    DOI: 10.1186/s12913-018-3022-0
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-01923238
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-01923238/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1186/s12913-018-3022-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jon Hartwick & Henri Barki, 1994. "Explaining the Role of User Participation in Information System Use," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(4), pages 440-465, April.
    2. Rajagopal, 2014. "The Human Factors," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Architecting Enterprise, chapter 9, pages 225-249, Palgrave Macmillan.
    3. Viswanath Venkatesh, 2000. "Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 342-365, December.
    4. Nancy Paule Melone, 1990. "A Theoretical Assessment of the User-Satisfaction Construct in Information Systems Research," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(1), pages 76-91, January.
    5. Reich, Adam, 2012. "Disciplined doctors: The electronic medical record and physicians' changing relationship to medical knowledge," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(7), pages 1021-1028.
    6. Viswanath Venkatesh & Xiaojun Zhang & Tracy A. Sykes, 2011. "“Doctors Do Too Little Technology”: A Longitudinal Field Study of an Electronic Healthcare System Implementation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 523-546, September.
    7. Tarabashkina, Liudmila & Quester, Pascale & Crouch, Roberta, 2016. "Exploring the moderating effect of children's nutritional knowledge on the relationship between product evaluations and food choice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 145-152.
    8. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhou Lulin & Joseph Owusu-Marfo & Henry Asante Antwi & Maxwell Opuni Antwi & Xinglong Xu, 2020. "Nurses’ Readiness in the Adoption of Hospital Electronic Information Management Systems in Ghana: The Application of the Structural Equation Modeling and the UTAUT Model," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(2), pages 21582440209, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Claudio Vitari & Roxana Ologeanu-Taddei, 2018. "The intention to use an electronic health record and its antecedents among three different categories of clinical staff," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) halshs-01923238, HAL.
    2. Chen Wei, 2021. "The influence of Consumers’ Purchase intention on Smart Wearable Device: A study of Consumers in East China," International Journal of Science and Business, IJSAB International, vol. 5(8), pages 46-72.
    3. Anna De Benedictis & Emanuele Lettieri & Michela Piredda & Raffaella Gualandi & Maddalena De Maria & Daniela Tartaglini, 2021. "Development and psychometric testing of a new measure of the determinants that influence the adoption of WhatsApp in hospitals," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-14, December.
    4. Fosso Wamba, Samuel & Bhattacharya, Mithu & Trinchera, Laura & Ngai, Eric W.T., 2017. "Role of intrinsic and extrinsic factors in user social media acceptance within workspace: Assessing unobserved heterogeneity," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 1-13.
    5. Lionel P. Robert Jr. & Tracy Ann Sykes, 2017. "Extending the Concept of Control Beliefs: Integrating the Role of Advice Networks," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 84-96, March.
    6. Sung S. Kim & Naresh K. Malhotra, 2005. "A Longitudinal Model of Continued IS Use: An Integrative View of Four Mechanisms Underlying Postadoption Phenomena," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 741-755, May.
    7. Yajiong Xue & Huigang Liang & Liansheng Wu, 2011. "Punishment, Justice, and Compliance in Mandatory IT Settings," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(2), pages 400-414, June.
    8. Agarwal, Reeti & Rastogi, Sanjay & Mehrotra, Ankit, 2009. "Customers’ perspectives regarding e-banking in an emerging economy," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 340-351.
    9. Nathan Hopkins & Mary Tate & Allan Sylvester & David Johnstone, 2017. "Motivations for 21st century school children to bring their own device to school," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 1191-1203, October.
    10. Markus Blut & Cheng Wang, 2020. "Technology readiness: a meta-analysis of conceptualizations of the construct and its impact on technology usage," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 649-669, July.
    11. Dhir, Amandeep & Kaur, Puneet & Rajala, Risto, 2018. "Why do young people tag photos on social networking sites? Explaining user intentions," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 117-127.
    12. Oghuma, Apollos Patricks & Chang, Younghoon & Libaque-Saenz, Christian Fernando & Park, Myeong-Cheol & Rho, Jae Jeung, 2015. "Benefit-confirmation model for post-adoption behavior of mobile instant messaging applications: A comparative analysis of KakaoTalk and Joyn in Korea," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 658-677.
    13. Ni Huang & Zhijun Yan & Haonan Yin, 2021. "Effects of Online–Offline Service Integration on e‐Healthcare Providers: A Quasi‐Natural Experiment," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(8), pages 2359-2378, August.
    14. Yu-Hsi Yuan & Sang-Bing Tsai & Chien-Yun Dai & Hsiao-Ming Chen & Wan-Fei Chen & Chia-Huei Wu & Guodong Li & Jiangtao Wang, 2017. "An empirical research on relationships between subjective judgement, technology acceptance tendency and knowledge transfer," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-22, September.
    15. Maria Tsourela & Dafni-Maria Nerantzaki, 2020. "An Internet of Things (IoT) Acceptance Model. Assessing Consumer’s Behavior toward IoT Products and Applications," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-23, November.
    16. Rajiv D. Banker & Robert J. Kauffman, 2004. "50th Anniversary Article: The Evolution of Research on Information Systems: A Fiftieth-Year Survey of the Literature in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(3), pages 281-298, March.
    17. Nathan Hopkins & Mary Tate & Allan Sylvester & David Johnstone, 0. "Motivations for 21st century school children to bring their own device to school," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-13.
    18. Yong‐Mi Kim, 2010. "The adoption of university library Web site resources: A multigroup analysis," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(5), pages 978-993, May.
    19. Andrew Burton-Jones & Detmar W. Straub, 2006. "Reconceptualizing System Usage: An Approach and Empirical Test," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 228-246, September.
    20. Mäntymäki, Matti & Salo, Jari, 2013. "Purchasing behavior in social virtual worlds: An examination of Habbo Hotel," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 282-290.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-01923238. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.